ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Effects of different HTO correction angles on ankle joint biomechanics in 3D varus knee model: a patient-specific simulation study.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The mechanical axis in the varus knee deteriorates normal ankle joint biomechanics. Consequently, degrees of correction angles may also alter ankle stresses. This study aimed to elaborate the stress changes in articular cartilages and pressure in the subtalar joint of the ankle joint using finite element analysis (FEA) with different osteotomy correction angles. Methods: Computed tomography and magnetic resonance images were propagated to get a full leg model that included the knee and ankle joints. Computer-aided design (CAD) software was used to simulate osteotomy. Then, correction axes were carried out. Osteotomy gaps were filled to mimic bone healing. Model A represents the varus knee. Models B, C, D, and E represent osteotomy models with a neutral axis and 3.5°, 5.5°, and 7.5° over-corrected valgus angles, respectively. Simulated loads were applied to the femoral head. Results: The mean stress in tibial cartilage (71.69 MPa) in model A was significantly reduced to 36.17 MPa, 34.55 MPa, 34.14 MPa, and 32.25 MPa in high tibial osteotomy (HTO) correction models B, C, D, and E, respectively ( Conclusion: The varus knee model and its corrective osteotomy had a definitive impact on the ipsilateral ankle joint and the hindfoot. Ankle joint stresses were significantly reduced in the 3.5° valgus model. Subtalar pressure was lateralized in varus models, whereas it was medialized in valgus correction models. Surgeons should consider these compensatory ankle joint biomechanical alterations before planning HTO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.